Next week I am going to be doing a short course in Oxford at CEBM called ‘Teaching Evidence Based Medicine’. I’ve just got the timetable today and it is going to be intense! Class starts at 8.30am and finishes at 6.30pm. My husband and I are staying in the centre of Oxford so it will be an early breakfast for me and a 20min walk to St Hughs. I plan to write some posts about what I learn but it looks like I might be pushed for time in the evenings. On Wednesday there is the group dinner at the college which starts at 7.30pm after a faculty Q&A. Perhaps there will be enough time to nip up to the B&B and collect my husband, who knows? We made a reservation at Jamie Oliver’s in Oxford for 7pm (I think) on Tuesday. I’m wondering how I can fit everything in … You can tell I am feeling rushed already! I’ve done the reading bar one editorial and all I have to do now is write out a lesson plan for critical appraisal (I already have one, just have to fix it up a bit). I guess we will be working ons during group study times. However, I’m hoping it will be a worthwhile course. According to the timetable, we will be learning different teaching methods for different aspects of EBM – diagnostics, statistics, SRs, and even searching (which will be interesting as it is a how to teach search methods). I was talking to someone from Cochrane about the course earlier this year and he knew someone who had done it and was impressed. He said it was geared more for clinicians though but that could be a plus as us medical librarians are supposed to be teaching this audience.
It has been all change at work. Not only are we merging with another library, but the Clinicians Health Channel changed resource providers from EBSCOHost to OVID (which I’ve not used much before) last week. We are losing CINAHL. So instead of a quiet time before leaving, I have to grapple with searches using the new interface. Fun times!
The BMJ and JAMA have collaborated on an important video resource about the history of evidence based medicine. Presented by former BMJ editor Richard Smith, the short film series includes interviews with early champions of evidence based medicine – Muir Gray, Iain Chalmers, and David Sackett. This page not only includes these videos but also provides various links to key papers and multimedia about evidence based medicine. There are more videos on a similar page on the JAMA Network website. Find more BMJ articles on evidence based practice here.
Shaneyfelt et al. Instruments for Evaluating Education in Evidence-Based Practice: A Systematic Review. JAMA. 2006;296(9):1116-1127. doi:
Context Evidence-based practice (EBP) is the integration of the best research evidence with patients’ values and clinical circumstances in clinical decision making. Teaching of EBP should be evaluated and guided by evidence of its own effectiveness.
Objective To appraise, summarize, and describe currently available EBP teaching evaluation instruments.
Data Sources and Study Selection We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, HAPI, and ERIC databases; reference lists of retrieved articles; EBP Internet sites; and 8 education journals from 1980 through April 2006. For inclusion, studies had to report an instrument evaluating EBP, contain sufficient description to permit analysis, and present quantitative results of administering the instrument.
Data Extraction Two raters independently abstracted information on the development, format, learner levels, evaluation domains, feasibility, reliability, and validity of the EBP evaluation instruments from each article. We defined 3 levels of instruments based on the type, extent, methods, and results of psychometric testing and suitability for different evaluation purposes.
Data Synthesis Of 347 articles identified, 115 were included, representing 104 unique instruments. The instruments were most commonly administered to medical students and postgraduate trainees and evaluated EBP skills. Among EBP skills, acquiring evidence and appraising evidence were most commonly evaluated, but newer instruments evaluated asking answerable questions and applying evidence to individual patients. Most behavior instruments measured the performance of EBP steps in practice but newer instruments documented the performance of evidence-based clinical maneuvers or patient-level outcomes. At least 1 type of validity evidence was demonstrated for 53% of instruments, but 3 or more types of validity evidence were established for only 10%. High-quality instruments were identified for evaluating the EBP competence of individual trainees, determining the effectiveness of EBP curricula, and assessing EBP behaviors with objective outcome measures.
Conclusions Instruments with reasonable validity are available for evaluating some domains of EBP and may be targeted to different evaluation needs. Further development and testing is required to evaluate EBP attitudes, behaviors, and more recently articulated EBP skills.
Evaluation tools: EBM Fresno Test | Berlin Questionnaire